Please refute anything in this statement:

I still do not see how making suggestions here is any different than it would be if it was during a hub turn meeting. The negotiating commitees strength will be determined by our unity. One thing that can effect our unity is our openers. Our openers will be better with more inputs not fewer. This thread will facilitate more inputs to the block reps. This thread is good.

En Lieu of that post something from someone trained that this thread is not good. Or are we back to nuance?

 

No. Tell me what negotiation training you've had.

If none, I highly recommend you put the question to someone who has received training. I am not trained but have spoken to folks who have been.

Being educated in negotiation is important in fully understanding it and to be successful at this level. There are lots of factors that come into play. This is an area where good advice is crucial.




On second thought - You may want to just give up on the nuance thing. I don't think you'll ever get it. You draw an improper parallel with the FDA LOA and this web board. This is a new day in a new jet.

 

Whatever benefit the original intent of this thread had is long gone by the arguement over if hurts our negotiating or not.

I wouldn't have posted my ideas if I thought in anyway it hurt our negotiating. I still think this is a great way to pass ideas on improvements to the next contract, unless in our openers our negotiating committee says, "We have contacted the users of APC and have determined this is what we want." Fortunately for us, that is not what will happen. What hurts our negotiators if these ideas are never passed to them thru block reps, meetings, and such.

 

What question? Should we or should we not talk about things we would like to see in the next contract? Why don't you ask them and tell us all.

You posted a quote from me and ask me what negotiating training I have had. But you can't tell me what is wrong with my post?

I don't think you are qualifed to judge what an improper parallel is. What training have you had?

Are you saying that they can judge the will of the crew force by reading this forum?

 

I believe in the latest Block 8 update(sorry, I deleted the forward from my e-mail account last week) DR said that he was happy about all of the incoming contract input and ideas, but he was declining to speak about the themes/results of the input ahead of openers because of management's prying eyes. Perhaps someone out there has a copy of the e-mail still, although somehow I doubt that would satisfy your question.

 

You are correct sir. I would not expect an official union dude to post on here before or after openers.

Something like: please don't post any ideas you have on the next contract would do it for me. Although some logical explanation would be in order.

I personally think this forum encourages communication with block reps, don't you? It sure did during LOA ratification. You don't think that is good?

Should we all go back and delete our posts where we say 4A2b sucks and needs to be fixed? I mean if the company finds out we don't like it that could really hurt our bargaining position.

 

I was referencing an e-mail, not any of the officials posting here. While it's nice to have the few that do, what they say cannot truly be considered official comm imo(not a judge's!).

We're both deep into speculation here, but my guess would be no. It certainly exposes our individual thoughts to more people than would occur otherwise, however my personal experience with web boards and unions over the years leads me to believe that most of the people posting are the same ones who do in fact contact the reps, stay up with the emails, attend meetings, etc. In general the lurkers stay lurking, although there have been seminal events that have increased their participation(Age 60 for example). I have no way to substantiate that is the case here as well, but that's my best guess.

Is it official LAG policy that all posts must contain at least one zinger? I would say that the parallel you've drawn has again missed the mark, but it does make good use of a hot attention-getting buzzword. 4a2b, FDA, ALPA,.....9/11(too soon as Brian Griffin would say?)

 

I guess it was not clear. No I don't think the block 8 rep saying he would not discuss inputs he received before after openers as a request that others refrain from talking about what they would like to see in the next contract.


I guess we will have to disagree here, what a shock.


Only if I can think of a zinger. You don't think fixing 4A2b falls into the category of what we would like to see in the next contract? If so I guess it is only logical to assume that you think that subject should not be broached except in private comm to your block rep.

This is the second post where you imply I have some sort of ulterior motive. I will break ALPA (wahahahaha). No, I just don't think posting about what I would like to see in the next contract hurts the effort and I certainly like reading what others think are important. I do take exception to being told (imply) I am not a good union member by some people who have no official function other than to read tea leaves and interpret what ALPA policy should be.

 

Just curious...What's the definition of a good union member?

 

At least 6.5 inches with a respectable girth